FCS: Hmm... I would argue that there are no sente getting tesuji... only sente retaining tesuji (and plays) and gote plays.
BadZen: Well, I've encountered positions which make a particular move sente that before was gote. Perhaps this is what is meant? (Since I'm a rank beginner (learned the rules earlier this week =) I'll leave it up to someone else to provide an example...)
BillSpight: Well, if your opponent plays first in an area and you have a tesuji to allow you to tenuki, that would be a sente-getting tesuji, right?
You will find a nice sente-retaining tesuji in the "Sente" diagram of EndgameClamp.
Charles See also taking sente in a ko.
Charles This looks like an example to me.
has the feel of a sente-getting tesuji. (This is from a game Takagawa Kaku-Nabeshima Ichiro 1927-12-13.)
Is it right to say that Black had sente at the start of the sequence? Well, the stone was played as a pincer on
, at a time when Black did have sente in the game as a whole.
Now Black connects in order to have some shape on the right.
White plays the staircase with and
, and duly connects solidly with
. This takes sente again, and White can attack with
.
It was a two-stone handicap game; White's play is quite typical.
Example by Kungfu (obscure) moved to /Discussion by Charles Matthews.
Jasonred Ah, I finally figured this one out. There shouldn't be any such thing, cause either the tesuji is sente, or it isn't. Whereas by "getting" you mean, like eye stealing tesuji? Well, then you shouldn't have such a thing, as you can't play a move on your opponents turn, can you?
Wait... maybe this sente-getting tesuji refers to a situation, when player A thinks his move is sente, but in actual fact, a clever tesuji by B turns the move into gote for A, effectively giving sente to B, and thus "stealing" sente?
When you don't play a mundane move that is locally worth a certain number of points and ends in gote and instead play a tesuji that ends with fewer points, but in sente, you give up points but "get sente."John Pinkerton?